PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
January 5, 1968Science6,478 citations

The Matthew Effect in Science

View Full Paper
RMRobert Κ. Merton

Key Points

  • The aim is to analyze the Matthew effect as it influences visibility and recognition in science.
  • Examined psychosocial conditions and mechanisms associated with the Matthew effect.
  • Analyzed collaboration and independent discoveries among scientists of varying prominence.
  • Investigated the impacts on the communication system within the scientific community.
  • Identified a correlation between multiple discoveries and visibility of established scientists.
  • Noted that eminent scientists receive disproportionate credit, diminishing the visibility of lesser-known contributors.
  • Described how self-assurance of prominent scientists motivates them to tackle significant, risky problems.

Abstract

This account of the Matthew effect is another small exercise in the psychosociological analysis of the workings of science as a social institution. The initial problem is transformed by a shift in theoretical perspective. As originally identified, the Matthew effect was construed in terms of enhancement of the position of already eminent scientists who are given disproportionate credit in cases of collaboration or of independent multiple discoveries. Its significance was thus confined to its implications for the reward system of science. By shifting the angle of vision, we note other possible kinds of consequences, this time for the communication system of science. The Matthew effect may serve to heighten the visibility of contributions to science by scientists of acknowledged standing and to reduce the visibility of contributions by authors who are less well known. We examine the psychosocial conditions and mechanisms underlying this effect and find a correlation between the redundancy function of multiple discoveries and the focalizing function of eminent men of science—a function which is reinforced by the great value these men place upon finding basic problems and by their self-assurance. This self-assurance, which is partly inherent, partly the result of experiences and associations in creative scientific environments, and partly a result of later social validation of their position, encourages them to search out risky but important problems and to highlight the results of their inquiry. A macrosocial version of the Matthew principle is apparently involved in those processes of social selection that currently lead to the concentration of scientific resources and talent.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Robert Κ. Merton (1968) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69daab76387cf706986874ffhttps://doi.org/10.1126/science.159.3810.56
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Scientists at Major and Minor Universities: A Study of Productivity and Recognition1965 · 507 citations
  2. 2Patterns of Name Ordering Among Authors of Scientific Papers: A Study of Social Symbolism and Its Ambiguity1968 · 247 citations
  3. 3Resistance by Scientists to Scientific Discovery1961 · 484 citations
  4. 4Priorities in Scientific Discovery: A Chapter in the Sociology of Science1957 · 1,599 citations
  5. 5American Use of Soviet Medical Research1958 · 5 citations